i'll try any opening advised against e4 for about a month

Sort:
LeVeloDeBertrand

Hello everyone;

Id like to expand some my chess knowledge and train more and different middlegame positions.

i'm a caro kann player, i don't look for opening advantages early on, just some natural move and rapid developement that get me to a ok (or good middlegame). An openin that doesn't require a huge amount of prep or line/sidelines study (i'll study the opening by studying annotated game book. Easier and more fun for my little brain).

Against d4 i played shortly the benoni, and now i play the Nimzo ( both very different)

After a few posts i'll try, for about a month, the most advised opening. After that i'll give feedback and post the most interesting games in my view. I'll then decide if i want to switch immediatly to try  the second most commented. I wont repeat this process i'll fix myself for at least 3 month to those 3 openings ( caro kann in some case, and the 2 most popular posted)

i played the french before the caro kann which was fun. But just for the game, don't suggest it. I'll try anyother!!

Good evening ladies and gentlemens happy.png

Sqod

You should first specify your taste, temperament, and outcome goal, since those determine which openings are best for you, not "Hey, maybe I'll try this move for a while." 

In particular, after 1. e4:

1...c5: "I want sharp tactics and a difficult game for both players from start to finish, because the tactically best player will win, and that will be me."

1...e5: "I want to draw via symmetrical positions, and I'm willing to memorize loads of lines to do so."

1...e6: "I don't mind having cramped, defensive positions the whole game if I can emerge with a winning endgame due to a better pawn structure."

1...c6: "I like a solid, defensive position, though without much hope of an advantage."

1...Nf6: "I don't mind looking like a fool by violating general principles and getting my knight chased around since I might get an advantage in the ensuing tactical positions."

1...d6: "I like being sneaky and letting White overrun me for a while, since he might get too ambitious, which will then give me an advantage."

1...d5: "I don't care how many patzers play this move, at least I understand it."

1...b6: "I'll figure out how to play the opening later."

1...g6: "I'll figure out how to play the opening later."

1...Nc6: "I don't know anything about openings, and this looks cool, even if I can't figure out why I keep losing with it."

 

LeVeloDeBertrand

Fair enough:
Its a difficult question happy.png I like the semi open games where the game are decided on the control of a semi open file or in a great outpost.

I like to develop quickly without really looking to much on a quick win (unless opponent invites me too).

I like the fight for central control (don't feel super comfy when opponent has crushing center control)

I don't like very sharp and or wild openings. I just try to get to a ok or even favourable middlegame position by building slowly but surely until a good or very good endgame position (often, if the game went well for me, i finish in the early endgame due to crushing middlegame position)

I don't like when the games get very cramped and white has clear space advantage

my137thaccount
LeVeloDeBertrand wrote:

Fair enough:
Its a difficult question  I like the semi open games where the game are decided on the control of a semi open file or in a great outpost.

I like to develop quickly without really looking to much on a quick win (unless opponent invites me too).

I like the fight for central control (don't feel super comfy when opponent has crushing center control)

I don't like very sharp and or wild openings. I just try to get to a ok or even favourable middlegame position by building slowly but surely until a good or very good endgame position (often, if the game went well for me, i finish in the early endgame due to crushing middlegame position)

I don't like when the games get very cramped and white has clear space advantage

Taking this into account and the fact that you've already tried the French and Caro-Kann, I recommend the Accelerated Dragon Sicilian. Try it for a month and see how you do happy.png

VikrantPlaysD4

I'd say personality tells you to try Sicilian w Nc6 (forgot variation name.)

delcarpenter

Personally I've been playing c5, just recently went back to mostly e5.  I don't pay much attention to opening names so I don't know whether you already ruled out either.

I enjoyed reading Sqod's characterizations.   

ThrillerFan
delcarpenter wrote:

Personally I've been playing c5, just recently went back to mostly e5.  I don't pay much attention to opening names so I don't know whether you already ruled out either.

I enjoyed reading Sqod's characterizations.   

 

Don't buy into his descriptions.  They are blanket statements that might be true at random times, but take the following and you tell me if Black is cramped and defending the whole time.  I have played this opening for over 20 years, and probably a good 500 times, a good 90 to 95 percent of those as Black:

 

 

Sqod

My blanket generalizations were pulled mostly from Modern Chess Openings. Yes, with so many exceptions in chess it's difficult to characterize openings that early in the game, but in my experience those generalizations in that book do *tend* to be true. I'd post the quotes from the book, but the trolls and dummies here will just complain that the book is too old (as if the fundamental openings change every few years).

bong711

I suggest the Scandinavian 3... Qd6. ItsI easy to play and not easy to get crushed.

bong711
bong711 wrote:

I suggest the Scandinavian 3... Qd6. ItsI easy to play and not easy to get crushed.

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chess.pl?pid=14003&playercomp=black&opening=B01&title=Sergei%20Tiviakov%20playing%20the%20Scandinavian%20as%20Black

ThrillerFan
Sqod wrote:

My blanket generalizations were pulled mostly from Modern Chess Openings. Yes, with so many exceptions in chess it's difficult to characterize openings that early in the game, but in my experience those generalizations in that book do *tend* to be true. I'd post the quotes from the book, but the trolls and dummies here will just complain that the book is too old (as if the fundamental openings change every few years).

 

No "book" written today would make such a generalization except maybe a complete beginner's book that introduces openings 3 to 5 moves deep and simply tells you what the name of the opening is.  Otherwise, generalizations are useless!

 

Black is rarely cramped unless faced with a gambit line against the French.  He has a space disadvantage on the Kingside that is offset by often having a space advantage on the Queenside.

LeVeloDeBertrand

Thanks for the replies. I'm on my phone but if I read correctly 4 openings have been suggested: 1...c5 with Nc6, accelerated dragon, scandi Qd6 and 1...a6. So no majority yet :) I still wait for more suggestion to see if some think point out and will start playing it tommorow or the day after in daily ;)

bong711

The problem with Sicilian, you must study the Anti Sicilian too. The Scandinavian gives black the familiarity rights.

my137thaccount
LeVeloDeBertrand wrote:

Thanks for the replies. I'm on my phone but if I read correctly 4 openings have been suggested: 1...c5 with Nc6, accelerated dragon, scandi Qd6 and 1...a6. So no majority yet :) I still wait for more suggestion to see if some think point out and will start playing it tommorow or the day after in daily ;)

There's never a consensus on openings happy.png

However, there are 3 options for black in the Nc6 Sicilian - the Sveshnikov Sicilian, Classical Sicilian and Taimanov Sicilian. The Sveshnikov is too sharp from what you explained of your style, while the Classical Sicilian, Taimanov Sicilian and Scandinavian all have certain theoretical problems which would make them less ideal to play against prepared opponents, and which you can find out about at chesspublishing.com. Hence my suggestion of the Accelerated Dragon. 1...a6 was obviously a joke happy.png

LeVeloDeBertrand

Even though i knew it dubious, i didn't rule out 1...a6 since i remember seeing a famous game of Karpov-Miles with it wink.png

I heard some sicilian are easier to play than other, i guess the accelerated dragon is the most accessible?

bong711
LeVeloDeBertrand wrote:

Even though i knew it dubious, i didn't rule out 1...a6 since i remember seeing a famous game of Karpov-Miles with it

I heard some sicilian are easier to play than other, i guess the accelerated dragon is the most accessible?

White can play closed Sicilian, Alapin or Rossolimo. You must study the above + accelerated Dragon.

LeVeloDeBertrand
SicilianIs4Noobs wrote:

I tried the elephant gambit, paulsen countergambit for more than a month and it can be very sharp. Pretty fun if you like seemingly equalish positions that are very difficult

its almost the opposite i'm looking to test wink.png but thanks i didnt know the oppening at all

congrandolor

I also vote for the Scandinavian, grrr

Sqod
ThrillerFan wrote:

 

No "book" written today would make such a generalization except maybe a complete beginner's book that introduces openings 3 to 5 moves deep and simply tells you what the name of the opening is.  Otherwise, generalizations are useless!

 

You've gotta be kidding me. Has everybody lost their brains today? "No book written today"? MCO-14 from 1999 is called "the chessplayer's bible" and is currently available on Amazon.com...

https://www.amazon.com/Modern-Chess-Openings-MCO-14-Library/dp/0812930843/ref=sr_1_3?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1549922387&sr=1-3&keywords=modern+chess+openings

...and if you've ever looked at it you know it goes a lot deeper than 5 moves.

And "generalizations are useless"? That's a nice generalization, dummy.

 

 

respecthebish1

I actually like sqods opening descriptions even if he was agreebly off about the french so shut up@thrillerfan. As far as my vote for this thread: scandi